[gui-talk] any progress in NLS DTB limited access issues?

[Hoffman, Allen]

Anyone know if there is any movement to provide UAC for such products as
FS Reader for NLS digital talking books?  The concept that bookshare.org
can produce volumes of materials for various platform usage, with
adequate if not draconian IP protections, while the well funded NLS
chooses to keep things to non-mainstream platforms seems ridiculous.  If
this doesn't change soon I recommend folks start writing their
Congressman about finding new budget solutions to this problem.  It is
all well and good to have a benevolent NLS to provide leisure materials
for folks, but insisting we can't be trusted to keep our access terms is
just a poor way to serve the public as a government in my opinion.  I am
finding that I read far more from bookshare.org of late than NLS anyway,
so it may just become something irrelevant to me soon.  I just hate to
see tax dollars spent without a more direct connection between a
perceived problem and reality.  Same goes for the whole publishing
industry's perceived problem with copying of materials by people with
disabilities.  If your book was so good that it gets copied
electronically, you probably have buyers anyway.  Besides, if the
accessible version is not for sale, they were not missing any revenues,
and if someone is copying materials for sale then the publisher was
missing a market opportunity of their own.
 
I personally think that NLS should have a audiobooks sales licensing
side for publishers to use as they see fit-e.g. NLS does the contract to
get the materials recorded, and if a publisher wants to sell this to the
general public, it should be allowed.  Gives publishers motivation to
make things easy to get NLS to record, and maybe there even is some
revenue sharing, beyond taxes, that could make the project more self
supportive.
Anyhow, just wondering if it's time to send Congressmen letters, or if
progress is being made to improve NLS services for the modern world.